[Note - this isn't a political exercise, as I try very hard to avoid politics with the exception of when it undeniably intersects with prophecy watching. Having been involved in medical/scientific research for 30+ years, I just can't let this one go...Lets dissect this article just for fun...The issue here isn't specific to Trump, but the general view of government and the ridiculous expectations of such...The ONLY way to avoid any infectious disease such as this (long incubation period, etc) from spreading would be to mandate every citizen remain confined in their homes for 4+ weeks... Also close all modes of transportation, all businesses, schools, all retail stores, all malls, - literally everything - for at least a month. Absolutely nothing else would stop the spread of a virus such as this (long, asymptomatic incubation period)]
Lets dissect this article, for starters - based on the title alone:
1. What exactly is "devaluing of science"? What does that mean? Ok, lets assume we can define this somehow - the president of the U.S. doesn't like science...what exactly does that have to do with the spread of a virus? Does the presidents "mood" or "feelings" alter the transmission? If the president "valued" science does a virus suddenly stop spreading?
2. Lets assume that by "devaluing science" means the president cuts funding to (name an institute) ------ (CDC? NIH?) - how exactly does this alter the spread of an active virus? If $100,000 million were suddenly infused into all government agencies who could directly or tangentially deal with research - how exactly would that alter the transmission of an active pathogen?
3. "U.S. Coronavirus response"....Now what exactly does that mean? What type of "U.S. response" would alter the spread of a virus? Having a commission formed? A panel of "experts" to pontificate on the spread of a virus? Again, short of having every single U.S. citizen forced into their homes for at least a month - short of that NOTHING will stop the spread of this virus...Nothing.
4. "experts warn"...Who are these "experts" and who has defined an "expert"? Infectious disease docs? "Epidemiologists"? Physicians involved in medical research? How many of these so-called exerts weighed in on an opinion? Was it a representative sample? Was a standardized questionnaire created for these "experts"? Were the results of their views analyzed formally? How many "experts" formed a consensus? 10? 20? 1000? Who determined the appropriate sample size of these "experts" or who they are?
OK, lets turn to the article itself:
The Trump administration’s jettisoning of scientific expertise and the president’s habit of spreading misinformation means the US is in a much weaker position to deal with the threat of coronavirus, experts have warned.
Ok, what exactly does "jettisoning of scientific research" mean? And how does that alter the spread of an active virus? What does "scientific expertise" have to do with a virus and its spread? As a foot note - contrary to popular belief, the government doesn't conduct "research" which leads to vaccines, medications etc. This is done by privately or publicly held pharmaceutical companies.
---------
There are now at least 149 known coronavirus cases across 13 states, with 11 deaths. US lawmakers have put together an $8.3bn emergency bill to help contain the virus, with laboratories set to be allowed to develop their own coronavirus tests without seeking regulatory approval first.
OK, lets run with this one. Can someone please explain specifically how 8.3 billion will halt the spread of this virus? If treatment is being referenced, it would take several years to conduct scientific clinical trials on treating this virus, and ultimately it comes down to treating the various signs and symptoms, which is already being done. Same with a vaccine (excluding the Israeli company which was outlined in a previous post). How does increasing the number of "tests" stop the spread of this virus?
---------
[This one is my personal favorite - we now have the one and only "expert" as referenced in the title]
-------
OK, lets turn to the article itself:
The Trump administration’s jettisoning of scientific expertise and the president’s habit of spreading misinformation means the US is in a much weaker position to deal with the threat of coronavirus, experts have warned.
Ok, what exactly does "jettisoning of scientific research" mean? And how does that alter the spread of an active virus? What does "scientific expertise" have to do with a virus and its spread? As a foot note - contrary to popular belief, the government doesn't conduct "research" which leads to vaccines, medications etc. This is done by privately or publicly held pharmaceutical companies.
---------
There are now at least 149 known coronavirus cases across 13 states, with 11 deaths. US lawmakers have put together an $8.3bn emergency bill to help contain the virus, with laboratories set to be allowed to develop their own coronavirus tests without seeking regulatory approval first.
OK, lets run with this one. Can someone please explain specifically how 8.3 billion will halt the spread of this virus? If treatment is being referenced, it would take several years to conduct scientific clinical trials on treating this virus, and ultimately it comes down to treating the various signs and symptoms, which is already being done. Same with a vaccine (excluding the Israeli company which was outlined in a previous post). How does increasing the number of "tests" stop the spread of this virus?
---------
[This one is my personal favorite - we now have the one and only "expert" as referenced in the title]
“The US is badly positioned; the federal government isn’t up to the task,” said Judith Enck, a former regional administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). “When I learned more about this virus my heart sank because I know the Trump administration doesn’t value basic science, it doesn’t understand it and it tends to reject it when it conflicts with its political narrative.”
Enck said that Trump “doesn’t seem to understand what a clinical trial is”, a reference to a White House meeting with pharmaceutical executives...
Now we have our single "expert"..."a former regional administrator for the EPA" (seriously? THIS is our single "expert"???)....Thats it folks...Yep - this is our single "expert"....Again...How exactly does the notion that "the Trump administration doesn't value basic science" alter the spread of a virus?
Better yet... Trump "doesn't seem to understand what a clinical trial is" (and the author of this article does? I promise you, if I interviewed the author of this article he wouldn't have the basic idea of what is involved in clinical trials). But lets assume the president WAS an expert in clinical trials...How exactly would that alter the spread of a virus? Anyone?
-------
This sort of rhetoric, mixing inaccuracies, wild speculation and blunt nationalism, has raised concerns that many Americans, including ardent Trump supporters, are not getting the right information to deal with the virus outbreak.
Ahhhhh...Got it now... So if "many Americans" (how many? 100? A million?), including "ardent Trump supporters" did get the right information, to "deal with" the virus outbreak, suddenly the virus would be stopped in its tracks. Right? So what exactly would the "right information" include? And how would this help "deal with" the outbreak? Anyone? -------
This sort of rhetoric, mixing inaccuracies, wild speculation and blunt nationalism, has raised concerns that many Americans, including ardent Trump supporters, are not getting the right information to deal with the virus outbreak.
-------
This situation is exacerbated by a downsizing of scientific expertise within the US government. The EPA’s staff numbers, for example, are a third smaller than they were when Trump took power.
The EPA???? The Environmental Protection Agency? So some of the EPA employees who were "downsized" would have had the magic cure for this? Really? The EPA?
-------
Clement said Trump should bolster public trust in the civil servants dealing with the coronavirus outbreak, restore the scientific strength of the federal government and fund programs that will help prevent the spread of threats like the virus.
Ok, now we are getting somewhere...SO - if only we could "restore the scientific strength of the federal government and fund programs"...we can "prevent the spread of threats like the virus"... How exactly would this work? Can someone please let me know specifically how this could work? More government funding can suddenly stop the spread of infectious disease? I didn't know this. Interesting.
The EPA???? The Environmental Protection Agency? So some of the EPA employees who were "downsized" would have had the magic cure for this? Really? The EPA?
-------
Clement said Trump should bolster public trust in the civil servants dealing with the coronavirus outbreak, restore the scientific strength of the federal government and fund programs that will help prevent the spread of threats like the virus.
Ok, now we are getting somewhere...SO - if only we could "restore the scientific strength of the federal government and fund programs"...we can "prevent the spread of threats like the virus"... How exactly would this work? Can someone please let me know specifically how this could work? More government funding can suddenly stop the spread of infectious disease? I didn't know this. Interesting.
Bottom line: Lets watch the news with appropriate discernment. The sensational headlines are done in order to generate income - lets not forget that and lets see the news for what lies underneath. Six major corporations determine the news and there is always an agenda lurking closely behind the scenes. Sadly, this is representative of what we all call "news" these days, whether it is written news or television news shows and we all blindly accept what we are being told.
Excellent as always Scott and I would love to post this on FB if you would allow it. I will wait for your yes or no though.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely - Ive updated it a few times since the original ( i just couldn't let it go as this is one of my biggest annoyances) - once I publish something its fair game - but thanks for asking :)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIncisive dissection. Thanks, Scott! This is from the Guardian, of course, a rag which even by its own standards, has descended to depths to which even some bottom-dwellers wouldn't go. Not only is their level of English abysmal, but they are so hard up for factual fuel that their scraping the lowest levels of information can be likened to scratching for cow excreta in a famine.
ReplyDelete